Mr.Najib, Is My Money Well Spent?

The Budget 2015 announced by Dato' Seri Najib recently, has received mixed reactions from the Malaysians. In fact, the recent budget also received criticism from the Malaysian economic experts such as Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam. The most important question is, whether the budget is really people-friendly?

The 2015 Budget amounts to RM273.94 billion, an increase of RM9.74 billion compared to the previous year. And as in previous years, emolument or the civil servants' salaries, is the largest component of the budget in 2015 in which next year, the emolument is estimated at RM65.6 billion. This is a big increment, especially when compared to the year 2013 which only reached RM61 billion.

Does the increase in emoluments relevant, when in reality, the government is actively trying to control the government deficit?

Eliminate the post of the Special Envoy

If anyone asks me about a field that promises money for life, I will definitely recommend the person to join politics (related to the ruling party). Within last few years, Dato' Seri Najib has introduced the positions of "special envoy". Datuk Seri Samy Velu (former MIC president and “famed” for his eloquence in Malay language) has been made Special Envoy to South India for infrastructure. Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting (former MCA president) as the Special Envoy to China and Datuk Seri Dr Jamaluddin Jarjis is the Special Envoy to the United States. Not forgetting, Dato' Seri Tiong King Sin has been appointed as Special Envoy to the East Asia. The Special Envoy post is an addition to the existing ambassador posts.

It is worth to be noted here that countries like India, China, United States and Japan have long had ambassadors and other diplomats from Malaysia's representing our country there.

Thus, the establishment of the office of the Special Envoy is seen as unimportant and just a waste of public money. However, Dato' Seri Najib is likely to deny this statement by saying the Special Envoys are appointed to bring in investment opportunities and other benefits. For example, Samy Velu has good relations with India since he brought many Malaysian companies to invest in India’s infrastructure-building during his tenure as the Minister of Public Works. In that sense, Samy Vellu is the perfect candidate to bring Malaysian capitalists to invest in the emerging India or that’s what Mr. Najib thinks.

For me, this idea is unreasonable. Yes, the success of Samy Velu helping Malaysian companies to venture in India must be taken into concern, but what is the current Minister of Works, Dato Fadhillah Yusuf doing? Could he not continue to bring Malaysian businesses to invest in infrastructure developments in foreign soil? If not, why should he be retained?

Likewise are with all the other Special Envoys. If the existing Ministers and the current ambassadors are doing what their tasked for properly, the office of the Special Envoy should by any sense, be irrelevant.

Many may be wondering why I am pushing for this position to be abolished. Before you call me an opposition “cyber trooper”, I should duly explain. This is due to the fact that a Special Envoy is paid up to RM27,000 as monthly salary. This is greater than the net salary of the Prime Minister! And perhaps, there may also be other benefits. Assuming the position of Special Envoy eliminated, the amount of civil service’s emoluments can definitely be reduced.

Eliminate the posts of Special Advisor to the Prime Minister's

Currently, there are four positions of Special Advisors; Datuk Seri Dr Abdullah Md Zin (Religious Advisor to the PM), Datuk Wira Mohd Johari Baharum (Special Advisor on Northern Corridor Economic Region), Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim (Advisor on Social Affairs and Culture) and Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil (Advisor on Women’s Development and Entrepreneurship). They are also expected to be paid with a hefty sum monthly, which eventually will result in soaring final figure of emolument.

It is never my intention to question the credibility of these four individuals and spread fallacies, but is Datuk Seri Dr Abdullah Md Zin’s post really necessary since Dato 'Seri Jamil Khir is the minister responsible for Islamic affairs? Should Rais Yatim be appointed when Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz is in charge of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture? And most important of all, should Shahrizat Abdul Jalil be appointed as Advisor on the women’s development when the Dato Rohani Abdul Karim is responsible for the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development? Was she appointed to the post just because  Dato Shahrizat is Wanita Umno chief, despite the fact that she has lost the election and was linked with the “Cow-gate” scandal?

Should civil servants' salaries be raised?

Yes, the government officials also need a pay raise, but any increment must be followed by improved quality and workmanship. But, is it happening in Malaysia’s public administration?

Public employees whom are not productive and are of poor quality are maintained in the government for fear of "losing votes". Several years ago, the Civil Service New Scheme (SBPA) was introduced and contained "Exit Policy", in which public employees will be evaluated every year and to those who scored less than 70% mark, will be sacked from the public service. However, the objection from CEUPACS (which later agreed with lower scores) and various other parties, SBPA has been replaced with the Transformative Remuneration Scheme which comes with no “exit policy”.

Malaysia currently has 1.4 million civil servants. For me, this is not so bloated compared to other countries because in Malaysia, army and police officials are also counted as public employees, unlike in other countries. However, we cannot and should not compromise with lacklustre performance of some civil servants and they need to be removed. Official statement shows that only 1.1% of civil servants scored less than 70% appraisal marks each year. If so, the "Exit Policy" should be re-introduced in a new form after discussion and explanation of all the parties involved. For this time, it is appropriate if a higher threshold mark of 75% -80% is set.

Conclusion

I personally agree with the rationalization of subsidies, but such attempt alone will not help the government to achieve or a balanced budget. My recommendation is Malaysia needs to reduce expenses in the payment of emoluments by putting the welfare of the people as the main intent, rather than to meet the "passions" of politics.

List PTPTN defaulters in CCRIS

Last year, many newspapers’ headlines revolved regarding Second Education Minister’s statement that errant PTPTN defaulters will be listed under Central Credit Reference Information System (CCRIS). This particular statement drew unexpected backlash from the masses and even from vocal ministers like YB Khairy Jamaluddin.

 

Yesterday, Education Minister II Idris Jusoh said Perbadanan Tabung Pendidikan Tinggi Nasional (PTPTN) loan defaulters from 1998 to 2010 recipients will be given three months to start repayment before being blacklisted in the Central Credit Reference Information System (CCRIS).Notwithstanding the fact that the idea of CCRIS listing does not bode well with the people, a bigger question arises. Is it a bad idea?

 

To the uninitiated, CCRIS is a Bank Negara-database system that stores financial records of Malaysians digitally for references by financial intermediaries in prospect of a new loan issuance. Each and every individual’s financial track that has taken a loan from any financial institution will be listed under CCRIS. And so far, it has become a “custom” for any finance provider to refer to the CCRIS system before sanctioning a new loan application. It has to be made clear that CCRIS is NOT a bankruptcy listing system. Only the Department of Insolvency can declare a person as a bankrupt.

So, will an individual with a bad financial track in CCRIS be given a loan in future? That depends on the financial providers’ discretion.

The insinuation of errant PTPTN loan takers to be listed under CCRIS is a good idea and should be welcomed. Such move will hopefully create awareness amongst the loan takers to repay their debt as per the contract. Commonly, these errant PTPTN defaulters will be warned by three (3) notices before any further actions are taken. Thus, defaulting in loan repayment should never be an option.

But, it has to be reminded that only CCRIS listing will not do much good. Why, it could even lead to more problems if appropriate reforms in PTPTN do not precede it. And here are my proposed reforms for a better PTPTN scheme.

11. Payment starts six (6) months after getting a job

Firstly, PTPTN which aims to be a helpful medium for higher education dreams of younger Malaysians should never be a “stumbling block” in crashing their future. For a better service, PTPTN should come up with a better repayment schedule. Currently, PTPTN loan takers are required to repay six months after graduation. Looking at the current pace of Malaysia’s higher education institutions churning out more graduates, more are likely to be unemployed for the first six months or even one year after graduation in some extreme cases. Hence, if current system resumes, more defaulters will emerge and more will be financially-hurt. Thus, in my opinion, it is best if the graduates are only required to repay their debt six months after landing in a job.

  2.Abolish the current 1% administrative cost under Ujrah scheme

Next, as PTPTN is a government-formed body for a special purpose. Thus, it is best that interest rates are done away with for the PTPTN loans. Although only 1% flat rate is imposed under a new plan, it can still be considered as an extra-burden for the loan-takers. It is understandable that PTPTN has management and operational costs but it is best for the government to absorb the costs to allow no-interest to be given for the loan takers. This is much better than providing free education and more future graduates will be financially stable in future, unperturbed by a huge debt.

It is my sincere opinion that the Government and PTPTN can look into this and hopefully, a better system in PTPTN is born for common good. Graduates are the national assets and let’s not destabilize by our own ineffective moves.

  3.Set a common threshold for loan conversion into scholarship

PTPTN has introduced a commendable plan prior to this, by allowing students achieving First Class degrees to convert their loans into scholarship. However, this has failed to be fully effective as in the current practice, the tertiary higher institutions have different threshold Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) to indicate first class degree i.e UM – 3.75, UiTM – 3.50, it is discriminative in nature for the students in institutions with higher threshold.

Thus, taking that into concern, CGPA threshold for converting loan to scholarship should be standardised at 3.50 (for Arts stream subjects) and 3.30 (for Science stream subjects). If such move is to be introduced, a level-playing field can be better fostered.

  4. Mandatory payment only after a certain salary limit

Whilst it is commonly understood that one is bound to repay his or her loan as promised, the struggle of the current and upcoming graduates should be focused. With sky-rocketing cost of living coupled with slow increase in salary, the financial burden of a new graduate is of grave concern. It is noted that many, if not most graduates, can only expect starting salary of only around RM 2,000.

Thus it is proposed that PTPTN should allow the borrowers to repay only after their monthly salary hit RM 2,500. This is to ensure that the loan takers do not default and are in financially stable situation. The RM 2,500 threshold that I have proposed is created after taking into concern the examples I know. However, PTPTN is free to set other threshold ONLY after proper discussions with the stakeholders which MUST include the university students.

  5. Top-up PTPTN fund annually.

PTPTN’s highest-level administration often voice out that due to actions of defaulters, the fund amount is quickly shrinking and affecting future borrowers. This should have never happened. The unethical actions of defaulters (although some are financially troubled) should not be allowed at the expense of others.

Thus it is recommended that the Government should top-up the PTPTN fund every year to make sure all financially-vulnerable varsity students’ loan application be sanctioned. Critics may claim that such approach is counter-productive to the fiscal consolidation measures of the Government because it increases spending. However, all quarters should understand the importance of higher education and provide access to financially-struggling students through such approach. This is apparently better that providing universal free education which serves as blanket subsidy.

66. Scholarship recipients should not receive PTPTN loans.

PTPTN ought to make sure that any recipient of scholarship, particularly from JPA should not be entitled to PTPTN loans. Certain cases have been noted that those receiving JPA’s PIDN scholarship are also receiving PTPTN loans. The worst part is where the loans are invested in higher interest-yielding trust funds to earn money. This is how some students are becoming “financially-creative”.

This could be remote examples but should not be taken with ease. There could be more cases in Malaysia and these unscrupulous students are “stealing” the opportunity for education financing from those whom are more in need.

Conclusion

PTPTN needs reform and it’s crystal-clear. Pursue all these reforms and other appropriate measure before listing the defaulters in CCRIS. This will ensure the sustainability of PTPTN fund.

UM Ranking; Rebuttals to Lim Kit Siang and Critics

Following the recent debate over University of Malaya’s non-participation in the famed Times Higher Education Ranking (THES), I as the coordinator of UM Economics Students’ Secretariat (UMESS) would like to offer my opinion to refute the statements by Mr. Lim Kit Siang of DAP and student groups such as Mahasiswa Keadilan Malaysia and Progressive University of Malaya.

Mr.Lim has criticised UM for “chickening out” of the Times ranking but instead choose to partake in the QS ranking which is often regarded as “less demanding” compared to the former. What Mr. Lim failed to understand is UM has never walked away from the THES ranking, but rather chose to defer the participation to 2017. This might, in turn create another question. Why must wait until 2017? Why not now?

This decision of non-participation was taken during the leadership of the former Vice Chancellor, Tan Sri Ghauth Jasmon. To the students of University of Malaya and those who know him in person, Tan Sri Ghauth is known for his concern and emphasis on international university ranking. However, he made the controversial decision of non-participation in the Times ranking because of several reasons. Participation in the QS ranking is continued as usual.

The History

Times Higher Education and Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) used to jointly produce the rankings known then as Times Higher Education–QS World University Rankings from 2004 until 2009. However, the collaboration was ended in 2010 with QS retaining the intellectual property and the methodology used to evaluate the varsities’ performances. The Times, on the other hand, collaborated with Thomson Reuters, with a different set of methodology.

The Times’ new methodology evaluates certain elements such as research citations in a different approach compared to the QS. Several changes in the methodology are seen as more-inclined to the Western varsities and less considerate on the upcoming universities in the developing countries. For instance, QS looks at the research citations done in the past five years while the Times ranking looks at the past 10 years. So, how does this pose problems to UM?

UM has been receiving research grants from the Federal Government for years, albeit in small amounts. Significant research grants only came in the last 6 to 7 years, after the Research University concept was introduced by the Government. With research grants growing many folds, ISI-indexed citations have also increased along the years. If UM is to participate now, the ranking would be badly affected as the Times looks at the past 10 years and our citations have been minimal before the significant increase in research grants.  To the uninitiated, under the Times ranking, citation (research impact) amounts to 32.5% of the total score and this can cause severe upset to UM’s performance.

Many proponents of the Times ranking cite UM’s “extraordinary” achievement in 2004 when it was ranked 89^th. This is often used as a reason to reinforce their stand that UM should participate in the Times ranking. What these people fail to understand is that, it is wrong to equate the ranking in 2004 with the Times ranking now as the 89^th rank is prior to the split and the current Times ranking is using a different methodology. QS, however, is using the same methodology as in 2004.

UM was ranked 89^th in 2004, 169^th in 2005, 192^nd in 2006 and 180^th in 2009. UM was not even listed in the top 200 for the years 2007 and 2008. Looking at these figures, one could easily feel curious at the 89^th ranking in 2004. Actually, UM “managed” to attain the best ranking thus far in 2004 because of technical errors in the submission of data. To clarify, in the QS-THES ranking of 2004, ethnic minorities (local citizens) in University of Malaya were mistakenly counted as international students, thus pushing the score higher and giving UM an incredible ranking. This however, was later rectified in 2005 and this explains the sudden fall to 169^th rank in 2005.

To all the critics and student leaders out there, UM has been doing a gradual improvement to its performance with the latest 151^st rank as the best so far, apart from the 89^th position in 2004. Hopefully, with continuous monitoring and improvements, by 2017, UM can and will take part in the Times ranking for the first time. With the transformation plan envisaged by the former VC ongoing, hopefully University of Malaya can yield a good ranking in the Times Higher Education ranking in 2017. 

To the current Vice Chancellor, from my observation, critical thinking and general knowledge amongst the students have been deteriorating for quite some time. Hopefully, something can be done quickly, as I believe there is no point in the University churning out “4 flat zombies” with no critical thinking capabilities. 

Open Letter To Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

Dear Tun Dr.Mahathir Mohamad,

Happy 57th Independence Day. Recently, Malaysia was shaken with your open criticism towards the Malaysian Premier, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak. Following this, some “political pundits” have even prophesised the downfall of Najib, after all that’s what Tun Abdullah experienced after your criticism and “out of UMNO” drama. 

To make the record straight, I am neither UMNO’s nor “the other side’s” supporter. Nevertheless, being a civic-minded citizen of Malaysia, I would like to request your explanations pertaining to various issues, spanning throughout your 22 years of Prime Minister journey. Although I duly recognise your contributions to Malaysia, any flaw and mistakes happening under your long premiership should be taken as your mishandling. This is what real leaders do. Hopefully, this letter is not to be seen as seditious.

1. University and University Colleges Act 1971

- I, as a current undergraduate in a public university have seen how this UUCA has actually encroached the freedom of the university students to express themselves and engage in political activities. The students have been barred from partaking in politics (until in 2012, when the Court declares Section 15 of UUCA as unconstitutional), but even until this very moment, the students are not allowed to engage in political activities within the campus.

Being an alumnus of University of Malaya, you should know that the Student Union in the past had better opportunity to represent the students. Nowadays, the grandeur is just in the name. 

The real impact of UUCA came when the then Education Minister in 1975, brought amendments by inserting new sections to the act especially the Section 15, which prohibits the students from politicking. The Minister is none other than you, yourself. Tun, incidents such as the Tasik Utara and Baling Demonstration by your former “favourite”, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim have caused you to stifle the freedom of the students. Ever since 1975 up to now, the students are facing the brunt of your actions. What is your explanation?

2. Malaysian Judiciary

- Following the crisis between your administration and the judiciary in 1988, you brought “many interesting ways to solve it”. I guess, you had enough when the High Court in 1988 declared that late Karpal Singh should be released from extrajudicial detention and the Supreme Court revoked the work permit of two foreign journalists that your administration froze. Maybe if you still remember, they are both from Asian Wall Street Journal and they wrote about suspicious financial transactions of some civil servants, before you started to take actions against them.

Seeing the meddling of the judiciary in your path, the Constitution was amended and since Barisan Nasional had two-thirds majority then, everything was a smooth ride. Article 121, which used to say "the judicial power of the Federation shall be vested in" the High Court. However after the amendment, Article 121(1) mentions "the High Court shall have such jurisdiction and powers as may be conferred by or under federal law".  The power of judiciary has been significantly reduced and amplified the parliamentary supremacy. The courts are now reduced to adjudicate under the laws as approved by the government. What is your explanation?

3. Virgin Forests of Sarawak

- Tun, after you becoming the Prime Minister, the record shows rampant deforestation in the forests of Sarawak. However, the loggings have been long on-going for years. Tun Taib Mahmud himself has made allegations that his uncle,Abdul Rahman Yakub (the previous Chief Minister before you become the Prime Minister) has dished out numerous logging concessions to his family members and cronies. But, as far as I know, no action has been taken, what more to investigate against him. 

Taib Mahmud, himself has been constantly linked with allegations of dishing out logging concessions to his cronies, squandering millions of dollars. Many Orang Asal lost their “Native Customary Rights” land due to irresponsible actions of many. Still, no action has been taken.

Perhaps, you would still remember Bruno Manser. The guy from Switzerland whom fought for the Penan tribe’s rights in Sarawak. He pressured the Malaysian Government to preserve the greeneries in the Penan settlement areas without being sacrificed to unwarranted development (like the “Monument of Corruption” Bakun Dam ) and unstoppable deforestations. Your administration took strict actions against the activists and caused more miseries to the ethnic groups. Tun, I don’t know how true this is, but you are even said to have sent a letter warning Manser saying “it is about time that you stop your arrogance and your intolerable European superiority. You are no better than the Penan”. If the words did come from you, is not this insulting the Penans, and even the other Orang Asal? What is your explanation?

4. Kota Setar Selatan 1969 Election

- Just a few days before the racial riot of 1969, in your election campaign vying for the Kota Setar Selatan seat, you are reported to say that “I don’t need the Chinese votes to win”, only to end up losing to a PAS candidate. Isn’t your statement seditious and racist in nature? Should it be even uttered by a leader? Have you ever apologised to the Chinese community, if you have really said so? What is your explanation?

5. Crony Capitalism

- Your administration was often linked to the debate of “cronies”. Why, even Tunku Abdul Rahman alleged in his book in the aftermath of the 1969 riot that “Saya yakin bahawa kiranya Dr. Mahathir menumpukan masa yang lebih kepada kerja-kerja parti dan tidak menghabiskan masanya di dalam perniagaan membuat rumah di Kedah bersama-sama dengan syarikat yang bernama Federal Construction Company, sebuah syarikat yang dipunyai oleh orang-orang Cina dan dalam perniagaan-perniagaan yang lain, maka kemungkinannya untuk menang dalam pilihan raya itu adalah lebih besar.”

“Menurut maklumat yang diterima, beliaulah yang telah mengambil peranan yang penting untuk menolong mendapatkan kelulusan Kerajaan supaya tidak kurang daripada 238 lot tanah Simpanan Melayu dikeluarkan dari simpanan itu bagi maksud projek perumahan yang tersebut”. To translate, he alleged that you had relations with Federal Construction Company owned by the Chinese and you had used your “connections” to convert 238 Malay Reserve Lands for the commercial use of the construction company. This allegation was made even before you assuming premiership. What is you explanation?

6. Suqiu 1999

- Before the General Election of 1999, several Chinese associations under the alliance called “Suqiu” produced a memorandum to push for a more equitable and just social and economic policies in Malaysia. Your administration, facing severe backlash after the expelling of Anwar Ibrahim used this memorandum as a springboard for future electoral victory by winning the votes of Chinese and others. 

Although your Cabinet agreed and accepted the Suqiu memorandum, as soon as emerging victorious from the election, you rejected it by stating the memorandum questions the Malay rights and supremacy. What boggles me is that, did you not foresee the impacts of the memorandum before accepting it? You are also reported to have said that "we were threatened then as elections were just round the corner. That’s why they came up with the memorandum, as a threat to the Barisan Nasional, and that if we didn’t entertain their request they would tell the Chinese not to support us.This was deliberate and the timing was well-planned. What could we do then?" Isn’t this a betrayal of trust and a Machiavellian tactic? What is your explanation?

7. Others.

- After BN losing the states of Terengganu and Kelantan in 1999 GE, the petroleum royalty payments used to be paid to the respective states were channelled into Jabatan Pembangunan Persekutuan. This has caused the states to face lack of financial source and seen by the rakyat as incapable of building and developing the states. Perhaps this is what you wanted.

- When the Court declared that the election in Likas,Sabah 1999 as null and void due to existence of phantom voters in the electoral roll, the 1958 Elections Act was amended to not allow the judiciary to scrutinise the voters’ list after it has been certified and re-certified. Is this a way to allow the elections tainted with unscrupulous tactics?  

- After the 1988 UMNO crisis, after which UMNO’s registration was annulled, the Parliament has decided not to allow the courts to challenge a political party’s decision. I do know that the Parliament and your administration (the Cabinet) are two distinct entities, but bearing into mind that amendments are proposed by the ministries and BN having two-thirds control in Parliament, your influence in such a decision can never be denied. Through such amendment, the rights of the members and the power of the courts have been significantly reduced.

What are your explanations?

I believe that all Malaysians would want to listen to your explanations and even better, a statement of apology if the fault lies in your side. Nevertheless, I would like to thank you for the changes you have brought to Malaysia. Your effort of opening up Maktab Rendah Sains Mara, albeit only 10% for the non-Bumiputera, had enabled me to study in the institution. Tun, several policies under your administration have also reduced the abject and relative poverty in Malaysia, although there are still some debates on the precise poverty rate. Thank you once again and God bless you.

Is Boycotting Israeli Products Really A Good Idea?

The conflict between Israel and State of Palestine is a never ending case. Numerous cease-fires were agreed, after much struggle only to be reneged not long after. Israel and the Arab countries have fought four major wars ever since the formal creation of Israel through the 1947 UN Partition Plan. The Palestinians had two Intifadas (uprisings) in 1987 and in 2000-2005 to fight the oppressing power of the Zionist regime. More and more people have died throughout the conflict, with the most coming from the occupied Palestinian regions, West bank and Gaza Strip (not under complete occupation).

So, before heading into the debate of boycotting, why are these two countries fighting against each other?

To cut it short, taking a retrospective view, in the past one millennium, the Jews have been persecuted ever since the First Crusade up to the Nazi-led Holocaust in Europe. Jews have been seen as unnationalistic minorities in Europe and as “enemy of the state”. As the nationalistic spirit of Zionism started to expand in late 19^th century, the modern day Aliyah (emigration) into The Promised Land happened. And coupled with the help the Sharif of Mecca, Sheikh Hussein (although he was tricked by the British Empire), Israel was successfully formed in 1948. Hussein’s son, Prince Feisal also agreed to the Jewish immigration into the former Ottoman Syria region, thinking the Arabs and the Jews will actually live in peace. Despite that, he never agreed for a separate country for the Jews. Again, he too, was tricked by the cunning British Empire.

So now, history’s aside. Should or should we not boycott the products of Israel?

We Malaysians have seen in recent times the act of boycotting products from Israel by many of us. This is actually part of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign initiated in 2005. The coordinating group of BDS has actually listed several products and companies of Israel and its allies which contribute financially to the Zionist regime.

The question is, why stop at Israeli companies? Whilst many might think that these companies are the main donors to the regime, actually they have missed the biggest contributor to Israel. It’s no other than the United States of America. The United States contributes USD3 to 4 billion on average, every year to Israel. Believe it or not, the US has given Israel a total of USD 121 billion since World War 2 and a huge chunk of this financial aid is funnelled towards military technology improvements. Recently, President Obama even announced an additional funding of $ 225 million to improve the home-grown Iron Dome missile interceptor. Other than that, US is the biggest exporter of military supplies to Israel despite its legislation, Arms Export Control Act which prohibits the US from exporting arms to countries with possibilities of conflict escalation. But alas, apparently the United States might hit back by saying Israel has the right to defend itself.

If you really think boycotting is an effective way to stop the carnage in Palestine, start with the United States. No more technological gadgets originating from Silicon Valley. That essentially means no more Facebook, Google and i-Phones. Xiaomi, Samsung and Lenovo should do fine. No more Intel computer processors, no more Philips fluorescent lights and no more sending your kids to the Ivy League universities.  And yeah, no more watching the superhero movies of Marvel Comics.

It’s not that I want to offend the ones wanting to boycott and end the aggression and brutal massacre in Palestine, but if we want to do something, shouldn’t we do it completely?

Israel gets its power from the support of its greatest ally, the United States. But can we really engage in the BDS campaign against the United States? It is very much implausible. To sanction America economically and to impose an embargo on trade with the US, will cost us fatally more than what America will feel in return. Simply because Malaysia’s economy is export-reliant and any disruption in trade deals will cause the economy to face lack of growth. Recently, when Bank Negara announced that Malaysia’s second quarter economy growth of the year is 6.2%, the mood was jubilant amongst the industry players. However it was also noted that such increase in economic performance was due to more export while the domestic consumption has actually fallen.

Thus, bearing this into mind, is it feasible to boycott the US? Of course not, since America is our biggest investor and one of our top five trade partners.

I personally am against any acts of economic sanction on any country. Conventionally, it is believed that economic sanctions can compel a regime or a government to comply with international pressures or even to stop engaging in inhumanely activities. Supporters of sanctions often cite the Lockerbie case, where after immense economic sanctions from the world, Libya’s former dictator, Muammar Gaddafi actually handed over two suspects of the plane crash.

For me, economic sanctions will only create more harm than good. Regime at the top hierarchy may feel less agony, but it is the common civilians who would struggle due to the sanctions. Islamic Republic of Iran for example, has long been under economic sanctions of the West due to its clandestine nuclear programme. However due to the sanctions, Iran has seen insufficiencies of medical equipment and drugs for the ill. Recently, when a plane IrAn-140 crashed in Iran, lack of replacement parts due to the sanctions were cited as the reasons.

In the aftermath of the First Gulf War, the Saddam regime was subjected to heavy sanctions for the attack over Kuwait and this has caused 5000 starvation deaths a month, one of the reasons the UN started the Oil for Food Programme.

When Cuba came under the communist rule after the revolution led by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, the capitalist (well, not entirely) United States imposed embargo on the Cuban goods and halted trade relations with Cuba. This however, never caused the communist rule to collapse. It is still standing strong till now. But the embargoes have caused deficiencies of clean water and spreading of diseases with lack of drugs to control them. Increased food prices have also caused malnutrition amongst many.

Why, one of the main reasons that compelled Japan to wage Pacific War against the United States was due to the embargoes on Japan after it invaded French Indochina. As US was Japan’s main supplier of oil at that moment, Japan advanced in South-east Asia to gain influence over the resource rich region and to offset the impact caused by the embargo. Pearl Harbour was destroyed also because of the same embargo.

These are the impacts that can be caused from economic sanctions and boycotts. When you are boycotting McDonald’s and Starbucks’ due to their alleged link to the Zionist regime, you are actually hurting their business. This will in turn, open the way for retrenchment of the workers and for less compensation. And no thanks to some hard-core boycotters, the employees of the franchises have faced humiliation and distress. In McDonald’s case, the chief of Malaysian outlets, Mr.Stephen has clarified that the contribution by McDonald’s to Israel was due to a programme called Matching Grant. The employees will contribute financially to charity of their choice and the employers will then match it. It is how McDonald’s actually gave to Israel, as its few employees have chosen the Jewish United Fund to receive their contribution. But as he stressed, the contributions to JUF is very trivial compared to the other charities. Why, he says, even Islamic charities receive the financial contributions.

To add, even the head of McDonald’s Israel, Mr. Omri Padan has made it a point that outlets will not be opened beyond the Green Line (1967 borders). The fast-food entity is totally against setting up of any outlets within the occupied region of Palestine. This decision has actually caused the wrath of many Israelis in the illegal settlement areas, but this has never caused Mr Omri to budge.

What Israel is doing is totally inhumane and cruel. It was never acceptable. Yet at the same time, the radical actions of Hamas of shooting missiles into Israel are actually worsening the situation. In the war between Hamas and Israel, it is the Palestinians who are at the losing end. Israel, with its immense military spending, is left unscathed whilst Gaza is destructed to the core.

While I mentioned that BDS may not be a good option, I respect the opinion of its supporters. But that alone will never suffice. Malaysian Muslims engaged in serious boycott act in 2008 when Gaza was in turmoil, but the spirit barely lasted for two weeks. What we actually need is the intervention from the international community. The United Nations’ Charter’s Chapter VII actually allows for international military intervention after trying bringing both sides of war-waging parties to mediation. We need just that. First, Israel needs to stop further encroachment into Palestinian region. Hamas, at the same time, needs to be forced to accept the two-state solution which is the most feasible and plausible solution. Hamas which is categorically against two-state solution in its charter should be requested to accept the idea. Any aggression from any sides, be it Hamas or Israel should be counter-attacked using international community’s sanctioned military. Only such stern actions can stop the conflict for good.

But then again, all these are easier to be said than to be done. Why? Any action against Israel by United Nations’ will most probably be vetoed by its greatest ally, the United States. Perhaps United Kingdom and France will also follow suit to support their ally, the US. These countries being permanent members of the Security Council are given the privilege of veto power. A veto from any one of the five permanent members can annul a resolution approved by the General Assembly, comprising of all the member states. UN is incapable of approving a resolution of military action against al-Assad regime in Syria, also due to the veto by Russia and China, another two permanent members.

With such veto power in place, not only the Palestinian conflict, but also others in the world may never be solved by the international community. The doctrine of “Responsibility to Protect” which complements Chapter VII will remain as a doctrine of no use. The governments all over the world, despite opposing the veto powers, are hesitant to take any solid action. Perhaps the fear of any trade sanctions by these five major economies is more inundating. Or maybe, they succumb to the fact that if a resolution is passed in the General Assembly to annul the veto power for good, the permanent five can still veto the resolution.

So, don’t we all have hope?  Yes we do! We need international uprisings, not to topple the government but to force the end of veto powers. People’s voices should be heard. Some might claim that the “Occupy” movements may have failed in their objective, but these worldwide protests have caused the governments to reconsider social and economic inequalities. The attention has been shifted to national discussions on huge disparities in wealth distribution and flaw in democracy, to name a few.

We need such uprisings again, this time to reform the United Nations. If the permanent five are unwilling to cause a change, perhaps a new international organisation should be introduced to replace the United Nations. After all, even the UN is a replacement to the failed League of Nations. This however should be the last resort as creating a new international organisation is not that easy.

I’m sick of this never-ending peace talk between Israel and Palestine. We need to stop it once and for all. Palestinians have the right to live and Israelis have the right to defend themselves. And above all, this is a conflict of humanity, not a conflict of Islam-Judaism.

MH17; Who Shot It Down?

Russians are worse off now, especially after the “phase-three” economic sanctions by the United States and European Union are now unleashed.  The purported “phase-one” started after the annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and the most recent sanctions were induced by the downing of MH17, a Malaysia-based civilian airliner allegedly by pro-Russian rebels. However rather surprisingly, Russia’s oil industry is be subjected to any sanctions directly. Surprised? Well, since one-third of Europe’s consumed oil comes from Russia, European Union has no guts to sanction the Russian oil industry as it will pose systemic risk to EU’s already struggling economy. How opportunistic!

Whilst the initial exercise of economic sanctions could be justified, the reason for the latest sanction is very much doubted. Before I even start, I wish to stress that I am neither a Russian apologist nor a supporter of Putinism. But looking at the pace where Russia is made a scapegoat before a full-scale investigation concludes, creates suspicion whether the US and European Union are trying to engage in a “zero-sum game”.

The international team tasked with the thorough investigation at the crash site has barely started its work. Theories and speculations are running wild on the possible causes that have killed almost 300 innocent lives on their flight en route to Kuala Lumpur. Any interested souls can have a simple browse on the Net regarding MH17, only to find almost 90% of articles in international news portal pointing their finger to Russia and its brutal honchos, the rebels in eastern Ukraine.

The fact that these sources of information, may it be by news portal or even from the “official sources” are mostly Western-backed or pro-Western mediums. Thus, by reading such sources, readers can be easily fooled into believing that the Russians are the ones behind this mishap. I am not suggesting that the Western news sources are all bad, but the question is “how reliable is their reporting?”. The Ukrainian intelligence unit has released a purported leak conversation between the rebels and a Russian military officer. The validity of the “leaked tape” has since been debunked by a group of international experts. How true the “finding” of this group is, too is questionable. Similarly, a video showing a surface-to-air missile being transferred to the rebel-stronghold from the borders of Russia has also been declared as doctored.

Okay, so it seems that the Western forces are unleashing their propaganda machineries to out-win their arch-nemesis, the Russian Federation. But, Vladimir Putin does not just stand by and watch. He too, has engaged the Russian propaganda tools to influence the Russians that it is indeed Ukraine, which is responsible in shooting down the MAS airliner. A research by the Lezada Centre shows that 82% of Russians feel that the Ukrainian force is the black sheep behind the mishap.

Both sides are busy influencing the world that their rivals are actually responsible for the tragedy. But as always, the United States and its backers are winning the race. As expected, none is and never will be, accepting the blame as it would only lead to international condemnation. To all the ordinary men and women hoping for justice to be done for the victims, do not ever fall into the traps of these propagandists.

In this case, the biggest propaganda comes from the United States. Let’s just admit it; most of us have huge admiration for the Uncle Sam’s nation, making us easily believing whatever it says. For me, taking a retrospective view, the United States is one of the biggest spin-doctors the world has ever met. The previous governments of the United States, be it under the leadership of Democrat or Republican presidents, have frequently used false claims and fabricated news to make the Congress and the civilians agree on the need to enter into a war.

Remember Vietnam War? In order to combat and defeat the Communist forces of North Vietnam, the Lyndon Johnson administration fabricated a false mishap called the Gulf of Tonkin incident, in which it was claimed that the Communist North Viet Nam force has attacked the US’s sea destroyer. It was because of this lie, a resolution was passed in the Congress allowing the United States to fight the communist force.

Remember the First Gulf War and US’s Operation Desert Storm? Iraq pursued on a mission to annex Kuwait, only to be stopped by the United States’ interference. Ironically, the US has aided Iraq when the latter fought against the newly founded Islamic Republic of Iran from 1980 till 1988. To obtain approval from the Congress and the public to attack the Iraqi forces, the George Bush Sr. administration fabricated rumours by broadcasting a “revelation” by a nurse who claimed to work in a hospital in Kuwait. She alleged that the Iraqi forces brutally remove babies from incubators and threw them onto the floor, leaving them to tragic death. This was also later proven untrue.

Remember Operation Desert Fox in 1998? The Democrat Clinton-government initiated this CIA-led operation by attacking Iraq by making false claim that the freshly-defeated Saddam regime from the First Gulf War has been hiding its clandestine nuclear programme and not cooperating closely with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to dismantle its nuclear facilities. This fabricated claim helped to “legitimise” the airstrikes on Iraq by the Clinton government. This claim was later repudiated by Mohamed El Baradei, the Director General of IAEA, saying instead, the Iraqi government and its scientists have cooperated in bringing Iraq’s nuclear capacity within United Nation’s requirements. This was even mentioned in his book, “The Age of Deception”. The lie fabricated by United States has created distrust among Iraqis and Saddam himself, making it difficult or even impossible to verify Iraq’s nuclear capacity after the Operation.

Remember the invasion of Iraq in 2003 or the “Purple Revolution”? George Bush Jr. fabricated a claim that the Saddam regime was developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programme and this will endanger the Western and worldwide population. This was the basic reason to topple the dictator Saddam. Although Saddam is not a public figure to be valued due to his atrocities, the actions of US to intrude a country by basing on false lies should never be supported.

I am not a US hater, but I urge the laypeople not to simply believe the information by the news providers, even if it is the CNN or BBC. Let us all wait for the end-result of the on-going international investigation (hopefully a neutral one). By the way, the Malaysian Premier, Mr. Najib Razak deserves plaudits for securing a deal with the separatists for a smooth investigation and return of the bodies and black boxes.

Who’s At Fault for Terrorism? We are!

Well, not every one of us is guilty of terrorism, of course since we don’t carry Kalashnikovs wherever we go. But, by only blaming the militants and religious extremists will not ever help us in combating ruthless atrocities. In fact, we are also at fault for the acts of these perpetrators of militancy.

Whenever the word “terrorists” are mentioned, we are quick to pinpoint at the Muslims. For us, they relish blood and they know no mercy. These are the people, whom we think, goes around assassinating anyone who goes against their will.

But, before moving on, what is actually terrorism? In laymen’s words, terrorism can be associated with any act that seeks to cause terror and fear amongst the population. The terrorists prioritize their agenda and for them, the lives of the people are worth nothing. So, are the Muslims alone, militants and terrorists? Of course not!

Remember Anders Behring Breivik? The man who massacred many innocent youths and civilians in the peaceful city of Oslo, Norway. He was a Christian, not a Muslim. How about Bodu Bala Sena? A Buddhist movement of Sri Lanka comprising of Buddhist monks and devotees that called for attacks on Muslim-owned businesses and pursued militancy activities. This group preaches about Buddhism, not Islam. Remember the “Saffron terror” in India? This series of violence was associated with the some Hindus, especially the nationalist-minded ones. They are not Muslims as well.

 It is wrong to equate a religion with acts of terrorism. Islam should never be linked to atrocities and so do other religions. As this article has clearly stated that terrorist alone are not to be blamed, let us now see how we or the governments contribute to terrorism.

IRAQ

Recently, the ruthless Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) group comprising of Sunni Muslims has launched military offensives against the majority Shiite population of Iraq in order to establish a Sunni Islamic caliphate, in hope for the continuation of Pan-Islamism which halted after the downfall of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of the Great War. ISIL has proclaimed the establishment of an Islamic caliphate with Caliph Ibrahim as its leader.

Sunni and Shia Islam are two major denominations of Islam. Although both belief in Allah and the revered Quran, they differ in many other aspects especially in accepting a Prophet. Sunnis believe that Muhammad is the last prophet whilst the Shiites believe in Ali bin Abd Talib being the last messenger. Members of both denominations have long engaged in offensives against each other especially in the Middle East region.

After the downfall of Dictator Saddam, the US government left a democratic governance system in place for the “new Iraq”. While this sounds noble, one should note that it was the US that destroyed the state under its more than USD 1 trillion War on Terror in Iraq alone.

The new government has been predominantly Shiite in composition and with the Sunnis being sidelined. The lack of an inclusive law has caused feelings of discriminations. Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has called for an end to “sectarian policies” and to include everyone regardless of faith and belief. If such idea is adhered to in Iraq, possibilities for the backlash of the Sunni Muslim community might drop significantly. Although the Shiites are the majority, it should never mean that the minorities should be left in the lurch. Apart from this, it is commonly believed that ISIL is funded by the Saudi’s monarchy to retain its control as the de facto regional leader of Middle East. Such support, if it is true, should be subject to condemnations and international sanctions.

 While funding a militant group for political expediency may be seen viable now, it will definitely backfire in future.

XINJIANG, PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

Xinjiang has been in the limelight recently for bad reasons. Recently in May, an act of suicide bombing has killed 39 civilians in Urumqi, Xinjiang’s capital. Barely two months before the mishap, 29 people were killed and 140 injured when eight knife-wielding assailants attacked the main train station in the south western city of Kunming. The perpetrators were recognised as the members of the Uighur Muslims ethnic group.

Uighur Muslims, an indigenous population of Xinjiang that used to be predominant one time ago. Of course, they still form the largest single ethnic group there but have seen their population share threatened as the influx of Han Chinese has become more inevitable in the past few years. The discriminatory action of the Communist Chinese government that gives economic preference to the Han Chinese has further caused unease amongst the Uighur Muslims. Restrictions have been imposed upon the Muslims and this includes prohibitions on fulfilling religious obligations such as visiting the mosque for Friday prayers and recently, the ban on fasting during the month of Ramadan as per the Islamic calendar.

Xinjiang has seen many brutal uprisings for decades against the authorities and efforts to establish an independent East Turkestan has been on-going. But this did not stop the atheist communist party from pursuing its control over Xinjiang. This is because Xinjiang is a vast area, rich in hydrocarbon wealth and it is also the largest province of mainland China. People’s Republic of China which is engaging in expansion of its influence overseas will surely would not let Xinjiang to be separated and lose a huge area with full of economic promises.

Ruthless incidents in Xinjiang are reflections of the discriminatory actions and policies of the Communist government. Indeed, such problems would not have arisen if equal and inclusive policies were introduced in the first place. Diplomacy should be given priority in solving the dispute between the two conflicting sides.  Plans to exert more authoritarian control will only seek to worsen the conflict.

PAKISTAN

Tehreek e-Taliban (TTP) has been making headlines recently for engaging in military offensive against the Nawaz Sharif government especially when the coalition of militants attacked the Karachi airport. This is the same group that shot Malala Yusoufzai in the past, TTP is also infamously known for its efforts to halt the polio vaccination programmes conducted by international medical organisations. To one’s horror, since December 2012 until now, around 30 health officers and policemen involved in the vaccination programme have been assassinated.

Vaccinations should be allowed to prevent any health-debilitating disease. Why on earth does this TTP want to stop it?

Blame it on the international intelligence groups especially the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Such intelligence arms have engaged in covert espionage agendas through the vaccination programmes. In fact, the CIA used a Hepatitis B vaccination programme as disguise to collect the DNA of the population in the neighbourhood to locate Osama bin Laden. Recently, CIA has openly admitted the usage of vaccination programmes to infiltrate into local population and pursue spying activities.

It is by the CIA that has caused the locals, especially the militants to lose faith and trust in foreign peacekeeping and medical teams. Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence group are to be blamed for the growing atrocities of the TTP.

SRI LANKA

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam gained prominence for its struggle to establish self-rule in north and east regions of Sri Lanka, which predominantly comprise of the Tamils. LTTE as it is commonly called, has engaged in asymmetric warfare against the Buddhist-majority government since 1973. It is only in 2009 when the Sri Lankan civil war ended after a major government offensive killing many members of LTTE, including its much revered leader Vellupillay Prabakaran.

Sri Lanka; a land blessed with myriad ethnicities and religions. It is also the place where Lord Rama fought the monstrous Ravanan in the Ramayana epic. Since its independence in 1948, the minorities such as the Tamils and the Muslims have been targeted under discriminating policies especially after Solomon Bandaranaike came to power. Under the name of affirmative action for the Sinhalese, the Sri Lankan government sought to alienate the minorities despite their struggle in helping the country to gain independence.

As the condition worsens, LTTE has tried establishing self-rule in the areas where the Tamils are majority. The government retaliated through military actions and in the process, massacred many innocent Tamils and raped many Tamil women, leaving them to die bare naked. Prior to the last few months before the end of the civil war, the government established “No Fire Zones” in certain regions, providing fresh promises to the civilians that they would be left unharmed there. However, the government broke their promise when the military force conducted airstrikes in these zones and killed many Tamils. The reactionary force even shelled hospitals in these areas, violating the prohibition under the Geneva Conventions.

LTTE is no better than the reactionary force as testimonies have shown that they have prevented the Tamils from leaving the no-fire zone although it is attacked. LTTE is also accused of using the civilians as human shields.

If the government of Sri Lanka has resorted to a more inclusive social policing and pursued diplomacy to negotiate with the LTTE, such terrorist risings may not have happened.

CHECHNYA, RUSSIAN FEDERATION

The Winter Olympics of 2014 in Sochi, Russia was marred by a series of attacks and violence. Most of the rebels are from Chechnya, a federal subject of Russia. The Chechen rebels are known for their time-to-time armed offensive against Kremlin. Vladimir Putin certainly made a wrong decision when he approved the location for the Winter Olympics at Sochi, a region close to Chechnya.

The Muslim Chechen rebels have been made to look like terrorists that threaten national security. Judging from their actions, they should be categorised as terrorists, no doubt. But, is the rebels are only to be blamed? I beg to differ.

Taking a retrospective view, the ancestors of the Chechen population used to subscribe to paganism. However, most of them chose to convert into Islam as to gain help from the Ottoman Empire from the encroachment of Russia. Later on, Chechnya was forcibly annexed by the Tsarist Kingdom of Russia and has since tried to gain independence until Vladimir Lenin promised religious freedom and independence under the October Revolution of 1917. This has induced the Muslim Chechens to fight together with the Bolsheviks (Red Army) and to dethrone Tsar Nicholas II. Lenin’s force succeeded and within few years, he died only to be succeeded by Joseph Stalin. It was during his reign that Chechen faced severe persecution and major deportation from their homeland due to claims of abetting the Germans.

Although the Chechens were allowed to return after the “fall of the Iron Curtain”, their attempt of forming an independent nation was foiled through the Second Chechnya War when Kremlin launched military offensive and annexed the region.

Persecutions that they have faced and an unachieved dream of independence caused by the Soviet Union previously and the current government of Russian Federation have certainly fuelled the urge of the Muslim Chechens to launch offensive against the government and its forces. Blaming only the Chechens will never help.

EGYPT

Sayyid Qutb, a famous Islamic scholar whose authorship has influenced many Islamic movements, scholars and terrorists. Many of us readily know about Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda and its affiliates but I believe very few have even heard of Qutb’s name. Sayyid Qutb has authored many prominent books that will later on influence the fledgling Muslim Brotherhood. His offensive jihad-based opinions would later “help” to create future worldwide-known terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Ayman al-Awlaki. Osama was the founder of the infamous al-Qaeda that was linked to the 9/11 attack, Ayman Zawahiri is currently his successor and late Ayman Awlaki is the top head of al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen. Looking at this alone shows the negative influence sparked by a man called Sayyid Qutub.

Sayyid in his younger times was an ordinary young man and believed in secularism. It was the Egypt Revolution of 1952 under the lead of Gamal Abd Nasser that shaped his radical mindset. Gamal Abd Nasser was the first President of Republic of Egypt after dismantling the monarchy of Egypt and Sudan and under his leadership dissidents of his leadership were caught and tortured as well as humiliated in prison. Sayyid Qutb was one of those nabbed and tortured in the prison cell. It is believed that this is where his radical mindset evolved. After released from detention, Sayyid preached and wrote about offensive jihad based on Sharia law to be pursued. It was through his insistence for offensive jihad that future militants like Bin Laden was shaped.

This part of history shows us that when a regime like that of Abd Nasser’s tortures and humiliates its dissident, the affected one can turn into the state’s worst nemesis. Gamal Abd Nasser and his generals are the ones to be blamed for the change in Sayyid Qutb.

TIBET

The case of Tibet is quite different compared to other examples highlighted by this article. While the people’s struggle in other regions and nations are seen as acts of terrorism, in Tibet, the restricted population resorts to immolate one’s own self. However, People’s Republic of China argues that this is akin terrorism and epitomise the oppressed Tibetans to foreign militants.

Ever since the Communist Party of China started to assert its influence over Tibet after the end of the Chinese Civil War, especially in 1951 when it took over Tibet through military means under Chairman Mao Zedong, Tibet has seen a never-ending struggle. The 14^th Dalai Lama has exiled himself to India and countless lives were lost due to self-immolations of the Tibetan who wants to see Tibet as an independent and self-ruling nation.

The Tibetans face almost similar problems in comparison to the Muslim Uighurs; an influx of Han Chinese and discriminatory policies both socially and economically that threaten the livelihood of the indigenous Tibetan communities. Again, the repressive regime of mainland China fails to implement inclusive policies that seek to govern Tibet equally. Also, the intention of the Tibetans for self-governance has been ignored to be suppressed by brutal force. Such actions will only exacerbate the status quo.

CONCLUSION

Governments throughout the globe should change the way they look at these terrorist groups. Always pursue inclusive policies and engage in diplomacy. Even if one is nabbed under the law, he or she should be tried legally and should not be tortured or humiliated to prevent any aggravation of the militancy. Stop using any humanitarian effort as a mechanism to engage with espionage-related activities. Politicians should stop making a hero out of these terrorists group. For example, Malaysia’s Prime Minister recently urged the members of his party to follow the spirit of ISIL fighters. He said that their spirit is never-ending and is full or courage as even the Iraqi government’s 30,000 soldiers ran away when confronted by mere 800 ISIL fighters. Such faux pas should be avoided. Never epitomise good values through dictating acts of terrorism.

Most importantly, we as the people should send out a message that peace is what we seek for. Criticise openly any politicians or governments that condone terrorism. As I’ve said earlier, the blame is not only on the militants. Everything starts from us.